kern9787 wrote:More spin cannot be generalized into more or less stable. It will equate to straighter in general, more HSS, less LSS. I can't expand on it right now, but I will in a little bit. Look up moment of inertia if you're curious in the meantime.

I agree with this. But something came up the other say during league play. 35-40 foot lie, ~15-20 ish headwind for my friend. He initially grans his putter and is standing sideways as if he is going to throw a slowish bh shot at it. He stops and gets a cfr gator from his bag, says he wants more stability for his wind, but then lobs his gator with barely any spin if any at all, wind throws it around, he is confused. I tell him that spin is needed for that disc to be "stable". He retorts without spin its " all stability", take into consideration hes regurgitating terms to make it sound like he knows everything which is common with him. But in fact, a discs rate of spin does have an effect on its ability to stay flat and travel forward at the same time right? To me stability is resistence to turn and fade during flight (staying flat basically) so without getting into varibles of weather and power req's disc to disc, how is this untrue?

kern9787 wrote:More spin cannot be generalized into more or less stable. It will equate to straighter in general, more HSS, less LSS. I can't expand on it right now, but I will in a little bit. Look up moment of inertia if you're curious in the meantime.

To me stability is resistence to turn and fade during flight (staying flat basically) so without getting into varibles of weather and power req's disc to disc, how is this untrue?

You have the right idea. In your terms, more stable = more high speed stable (i.e. more resistance to turn) and less low speed stable (i.e. more resistance to fade), which essentially means a straighter flight. More spin gives you exactly this.

Where we differ in views on this though is the low speed stability. In my train of thought, more stable is more resistance to turn (more HSS) and/or a stronger fade (more LSS). I can't say for sure if there is a physics reason as to why stability is defined that way, but that is the way I've always seen the two stabilities defined. Blame Innova.

Its this exact reason why I dislike seeing discs generalized as a more stable this or less stable that. If you were to ask 100 people which is more stable, a teebird or an eagle-x, you'd probably get a 50 50 split on answers and they'd all be able to correctly justify why they picked their answer (I'd guess you'd pick teebird based on your last post, as it fits your idea of stability).

I agree with this. But something came up the other say during league play. 35-40 foot lie, ~15-20 ish headwind for my friend. He initially grans his putter and is standing sideways as if he is going to throw a slowish bh shot at it. He stops and gets a cfr gator from his bag, says he wants more stability for his wind, but then lobs his gator with barely any spin if any at all, wind throws it around, he is confused. I tell him that spin is needed for that disc to be "stable". He retorts without spin its " all stability", take into consideration hes regurgitating terms to make it sound like he knows everything which is common with him. But in fact, a discs rate of spin does have an effect on its ability to stay flat and travel forward at the same time right?

I've seen winds do all sorts of nasty things to even the most stable discs when little spin is used. The best shots in these situations, for me at least, usually involve a lot of spin and just enough speed to get there with a putter or straight mid.

To give you an idea of how much spin can affect stability, its not uncommon for me to see my putters turn over more on long putts than they do on drives, even with some wind. I'm generally a (bad) pitch putter. My longer putts get a little more spin, but still don't have much compared to the velocity I put on them. Not to mention I probably keep the disc too flat for pitch putting. I should have more nose up. This has its advantages and disadvantages of course though (I have an easy time putting around stuff for the most part).

Yeah I've noticed that too. I compensated on jump putts with a lot of hyzer because of it, but I've since learned to add some spin and run straighter at the basket and the putter will hold its line better. Plus taking a more direct route uses less energy than trying to throw a wide hyzer jump putt.

In regard to your first quote ( on my phone and quoting stuff is a pain) If you take any disc, and toss it strait up with no spin what would happen?And with spin? This activity to me defines stability in a disc, im no physics whiz or anything like that and youre obv more well versed in this area, so dont take this as arguing or nitpicking im just curious.Maybe there is a disconnect in physics terminology and disc sports related terms. Everything in how a disc behaves is In its flight is directly influenced or affected by spin, obv not height since that outcome is controlled by the thrower, but maintaining altitude is influenced by spin. Turn and fade are in part byproducts of spin or lack of. Assuming all throws were the same obv.

The physics/engineering terminology is very simple, there is no way to make mistakes:

-A disc is flying stable if it is holding the same hyzer angle during flight.

-A disc is flying over-stable if the hyzer angle is increasing during flight.

-A disc is flying under-stable if the hyzer angle is decreasing during flight.

Obviously, the same disc can fly stable, over-stable, and under-stable, during different periods of the flight. Most discs have all 3 phases: they fly under-stable at sufficiently high speeds, become stable as the disc slows down, and then they become over-stable at the lowest speeds.

Confusion arises because people attempt to equate the word "stability" with "over-stability." For example, one might hear somebody say (or write on this forum) something like "the PD2 is more stable than a PD." This statement is completely false. (The truth is that the PD is more stable than a PD2; likewise the PD2 is more over-stable than a PD.) If somebody asks me what is the most stable disc in my bag, the correct answer is: "my Buzzz."

Disc rating systems (as crude as they are) encourage this misuse/misunderstanding, by assigning a number on the scale from under-stable (<0), to stable (~0), to over-stable (>0), and then calling it "stability."

Roc Lover wrote:That would be the disconnect i was talking about. Somewhere on whichever side of the discussion, someone was incorrectly using the word "stability" to describe something.

I think it was trying to use a single dimension or measure to describe stability. Discraft does it. Blake does it. It is practical to describe disc flight this way, but is also not true to the language.

Forgot to mention spin rate: The faster the disc is spinning, the more stable it flies (in the true meaning of the word "stable"). If it is in an over-stable mode of flight, but spun rapidly, it will fade/hyzer more slowly (inversely proportional to the spin rate), but it will still turn more left with time (RHBH sense). If it is in an under-stable mode of flight, but spun rapidly, it will anhyzer/turn-over more slowly (inversely proportional to the spin rate), but it will still turn more right with time (RHBH sense).

I've been experimenting with tweaks to my form, and today I had some interesting experiences. I've been trying to throw with as little arm motion as possible, and just throw with snap. I "FEEL" like I'm mimicking Kallstrom's style, not sure how I actually look throwing though. Ordinarily I have a big reach back, and get a decent amount of power into my throws, but throwing the other way my discs were behaving completely different. I throw an ESP buzzz for almost anything under 325', and I get a nice left to right fade at the end almost everytime with moderate power, and thrown on a hyzer. With the new throw I was getting equivalent distances, but it just flew dead straight. It held the line until the very end of it's flight, at which point it just faded to the left which was on a hole that was about 320'. I did the same thing with a beat up Teebird that I use for turnover shots, expecting it to start to turn over at about 250' into it's flight. Instead it just held it's line till about 350' or so where it hit a tree and dropped. My question is if these flight characteristics are indicative of the amount of snap(and thus spin) on the disc, or if perhaps maybe I wasn't getting as much power into my throws. I'm getting equivalent distances, with a little less effort, but the flight patterns are drastically different. I was under the impression that the more spin a disc had, the more likely it was to turnover, but this whole thread seems to say otherwise. Any ideas as to what could cause these flight characteristics given ideal(no wind) conditions?

archimedesjs wrote:I was under the impression that the more spin a disc had, the more likely it was to turnover

I think this is a common misconception and in reality spin stabilizes a disc which basically makes it straighter. Less turn and less fade. It sounds to me like with the shorter reachback you are getting a better hit and more spin on the discs rather than what was probably a speed dominant throw you had before with a long reachback. Did the discs seem to stay in the air longer and have more glide? That might also show more spin because the spin is basically what keeps the disc in the air.

Roc Lover wrote:That would be the disconnect i was talking about. Somewhere on whichever side of the discussion, someone was incorrectly using the word "stability" to describe something.

I think it was trying to use a single dimension or measure to describe stability. Discraft does it. Blake does it. It is practical to describe disc flight this way, but is also not true to the language.

Forgot to mention spin rate: The faster the disc is spinning, the more stable it flies (in the true meaning of the word "stable"). If it is in an over-stable mode of flight, but spun rapidly, it will fade/hyzer more slowly (inversely proportional to the spin rate), but it will still turn more left with time (RHBH sense). If it is in an under-stable mode of flight, but spun rapidly, it will anhyzer/turn-over more slowly (inversely proportional to the spin rate), but it will still turn more right with time (RHBH sense).

archimedesjs wrote:I've been...trying to throw with...snap...my discs were behaving completely different...I throw an ESP buzzz...it just flew dead straight...It held the line until the very end of it's flight...same thing with a beat up Teebird...it just held it's line till about 350'...

...My question is if these flight characteristics are indicative of the amount of snap(and thus spin) on the disc...I'm getting equivalent distances, with a little less effort, but the flight patterns are drastically different. I was under the impression that the more spin a disc had, the more likely it was to turnover, but this whole thread seems to say otherwise. Any ideas as to what could cause these flight characteristics given ideal(no wind) conditions?

LtDan914 wrote:...in reality spin stabilizes a disc...Less turn and less fade...with the shorter reachback you are getting a better hit and more spin on the discs...That might also show more spin because the spin is basically what keeps the disc in the air.

Right. More spin=more stability=holds the line better. In theory, you can make any disc fly straighter by adding more spin. Spin is a way of adding resistance to the disc's natural turning tendencies (both right and left). An Ape could fly as straight as a Buzzz, if you spin it enough.

Adding spin doesn't necessarily make the disc fly further, but it does make it easier to get the disc further down the line you choose. Without spin, most discs will not hold a line as long, unless the discs themselves are aerodynamically very stable (Buzzz-like).

LtDan914 wrote:...spin is basically what keeps the disc in the air.

Actually, aerodynamic lift keeps the disc in the air, but of course spin keeps the disc from turning and dumping out of its flight, thus helping lift to do its job longer.

Jeronimo wrote:So it will fly straighter?

If it is thrown perfectly flat and level, adding spin will make any disc fly straighter.

Yea, in ultimate (175 ultrastar) common pieces of advice for throwing into the wind were: more snap (spin on the disc), throw level, throw low.

If ever in doubt, consider the bicycle where rotation of the wheels stabilize the wheel/bike frame. Furthermore accelerating down hill does not make the wheels/bike frame lean, but rather further 'stabilizes' the wheels/frame.

A suggestion, try painting a line on the rim to see how fast the disc is rotating. Helps me tweak my form to maximize spin during practices.

As far as mechanics for higher spin FH, it seems my release point is closer to my body. Also not so much in front of me. I think of it as a shortened and compact towel snap. For some reason I get better snap throwing from a stand still. I would suggest a fan grip, but my middle finger is unusually strong for a middle finger.